MODERN TIMES
by Art Hobson
ahobson@uark.edu
NWA Times 20 Aug 2005
BOYCOTT EXXON
At a time when
failed energy policies are causing gasoline prices and our balance of payments
deficit to soar, Congress has passed a new energy bill that continues business as
usual while awarding massive tax breaks to fossil fuel producers. At a time when glaciers are melting all
over the planet and carbon dioxide concentrations are at by far their highest
level in half a million years, Congress rejected the McCain amendment to the
energy bill that would have placed a cap on US carbon emissions to modestly
curb the growth of greenhouse gas emissions while promoting carbon-free energy
alternatives, and the USA has opted out of international action on global
warming.
And yet a new Yale
University research survey reveals that Americans overwhelmingly believe that
the USA is too dependent on imported oil, and want new clean energy sources
such as solar power, wind power, and high-mileage cars. Ninety-three percent of Americans say
requiring the auto industry to make cars that get better gas mileage is a good
idea, 68 percent say the federal government should do more for the environment
with 49 percent saying it should do "much more," and 66 percent rate
global warming as a serious problem with 45 percent rating it "very
serious."
There's an obvious
disconnect here. Americans are
alarmed about energy and about the environment, and they want meaningful action
from Congress, while Congress passes an energy bill that could address these
issues but that instead supports business as usual and subsidies for fossil
fuel industries. What's
wrong?
The ExxonMobil
corporation, for one thing.
Although ExxonMobil is not the only source of Congress's short-sighted
energy and environment decisions, it's certainly a leading influence.
Hence the recent
call from Alaska Wilderness League, Defenders of Wildlife, Friends of the
Earth, Greenpeace, National Environmental Trust, Natural Resources Defense
Council, Sierra Club, True Majority, Union of Concerned Scientists, and several
other organizations, to boycott Exxon and educate the public regarding Exxon's
irresponsible and deceptive policies.
As one of the
world's largest oil companies, Exxon has reaped windfall profits from oil dependence
and the escalating oil prices that result from it. The company earned a record $25 billion in 2004, and $15
billion in the first half of 2005.
Exxon's president opines that America will continue to remain dependent
on foreign oil from the Middle East, and that we "need to accept the
reality of this rather than undertake expensive and risky steps trying to avoid
it." Thus the company has no
plans to move beyond petroleum and has positioned itself to continue profiting
from burgeoning demand and price increases. It spends very little on renewable energy development, in
contrast to such companies as Shell and BP (which now labels itself
"Beyond Petroleum" rather than "British Petroleum") that
are building businesses in renewable energy.
Exxon contributes
massively to global warming, denies that global warming exists, and funds
pseudo-scientific propaganda about global warming. Exxon's operations and products released some five percent
of the world's global carbon emissions during the past century, contributing
three percent of the total human-caused warming and two percent of the sea
level rise during that time.
Despite overwhelming scientific evidence and scientific consensus to the
contrary, Exxon claims that the "nature and causes of climate change are
still debated," that "science is not now able to confirm that fossil
fuel use has led to any significant global warming." In contrast, BP, Chevron, Conoco, and
Royal Dutch/Shell all realize that fossil fuels are important contributors to
global warming.
The instances of
Exxon meddling in global warming science are legion. They have given millions to organizations working to hide
the facts, and millions more trying to block meaningful congressional action on
this problem.
An
especially egregious example is the misguided probe by Representative Joe
Barton's (R-TX) House Energy and Commerce Committee into a specific global
warming study that disagreed with Barton's preconceptions. That study found that global
temperatures are now higher than at any time during the past 1000 years. Barton, who receives thousands of
dollars in campaign contributions from Exxon, is known as "Exxon's
tiger."
Mr.
Barton sent out letters to several global warming scientists involved in the
study, demanding their professional histories along with detailed data about
all the studies that those scientists had ever been involved in, and demanding
that the scientists turn over the computer programs they used in their
analyses, in spite of statements by the National Science Foundation that such
programs are the intellectual property of the investigators. The American Association for the
Advancement of Science has stated that such "aggressive Congressional
inquiry into the complete professional histories of scientists whose findings
may bear on policy in ways that some find unpalatable could have a chilling
effect on the willingness of scientists to conduct work on policy-relevant
scientific questions."
Others, including the National Academy of Sciences, express similar views.
There's more. For example, there's Exxon's 16 years
of legalistic maneuvering to avoid $4.5 billion in punitive damages to
fishermen and others injured by the Exxon Valdez oil spill, and there's Exxon's
lobbying to open the Arctic Refuge to drilling.
If even a small percentage of America's consumers avoid Exxon products, and Exxon boycott could bring real pressure on the company. You can help by joining the boycott, writing letters to the editor of this and other newspapers, avoiding Exxon stock, and talking with others. Go to www.exxposeexxon.com for information and further suggestions.